I am looking at the Daethwatch RPG rulebook, and I am crying. Not knowing about the rules, or the setting, I made a Space Wolf Assault Marine.

If I was a Blood Angle, then I could buy the below six (6) melee talents for 3,000 XP at rank one (1) no matter my specialty.

I get penalized massively for not picking to be a Blood Angle to the tune of 1,500+ XP for picking up the six (6) melee talents at rank one (1), less if I wait till rank three (3) or rank five (5).

I am a bit irked that three of the obviously melee talents are not on the Assault Marine (or any table a non-Blood Angle Assault Marine could pick from).

Talents 2-6 below seem appropriate for Space Wolves, and 2, 4 and, 5 seem appropriate for _ANY_ Assault Marine.

Why do Space Wolves, and Assault Marines get crap?

1. Assassin Strike: Rank 1 Blood Angle @500 verses Rank 5 Assault Marine @500.
2. Battle Rage: Rank 1 Blood Angle @400 verses not at all for Assault Marines.
3. Berserk Charge: Rank 1 Blood Angle @600 verses Rank 3 Assault Marine @700.
4. Flesh Render: Rank 1 Blood Angle @500 verses not at all for Assault Marines.
5. Frenzy: Rank 1 Blood Angle @400 verses not at all for Assault Marines.
6. Furious Assault: Rank 1 Blood Angle @600 verses Rank 5 Assault Marine @500.

Well there is always the option for Elite Advances....especially if you have a Blood Angel in your group. Even if you don't talk to your GM, you can see if they agree that it seems a little silly that some very Assault-y skills/traits/talents are not available.

darkrose50 said:

I myself am a bit unhappy at the characterization of Space Wolves (Fellowship and acute senses?), but I really disagree with your position on these. The TT game (and the novels) have taken pains to establish that the Space Wolves are NOT blood-frenzied berserkers (as a Chapter) but cunning, determined, unconventional fighters. Battle Rage, Berserk Charge, Frenzy, and Furious Assault all don't tie in with the way that GW has deliberately presented the Space Wolves.

In addition, the Space Wolves are not maddened by bloodthirst, like the Blood Angels, who TRY to control themselves, and then lose control in battle. Space Wolves CHOOSE to advance into the fray, and aren't swept up in madness and rage. The Frenzy trait is really appropriate only for those Marines who lose control in battle, and can't choose to do sensible things like Parry or Dodge.

Flesh Render seems clearly there for those players who want to emulate Blood Angels successor chapters like the Flesh Tearers. For most Marines, a good power sword would be a much better choice than a Chainsword, once such a thing becomes available. The improved penetration, the better damage, and the destructive parries (and destruction to the parried) all weigh in on a power sword. However, thematically, some Blood Angels (really, some Flesh Tearers) still use Chainswords, and this little feat lets them keep doing it without nerfing themselves. Plus, the emphasis on gory bloodshed that chain weapons seem to have really suits the darker, bloody aspect of the Blood Angels, that doesn't show up on the propaganda that much.

I am unhappy with the Solo mode of the Space Wolves, as I think it is a lesser aspect of their character, rather than the defining characteristic of the Chapter. Also, they are the only chapter to have a solo mode which depends on making yourself so much more vulnerable (take off those 8 points of armor and all those extra benefits, so you can reroll Perception checks!) I also think that they should have been given some of the more flexible combat talents as advances. However, I don't think that they should share too much conceptual space with Blood Angels.

I would have been inclined to give the Space Wolves a basic bonus to Strength (although I could easily have gone with Weapon Skill) and Perception, dropped their Knowledge of the Codex Astartes, and given them Resistance to Cold. I would have picked several different talents for advancement, mostly to reflect the fact that their entire Chapter is fairly flexible and skilled in close combat (so that even Tactical Marines and Devastators might have some talents more common to other chapter's assault squads).

I would love to see Combat Sense as an inexpensive option for Space Wolves. It's most useful once they have access to their Unnatural Perception.

muzzyman1981 said:

Again, Elite Advances should not be the way out of bad game mechanics. Otherwise you might as well just remove the careers as a whole and just use Elite Advances for everything.

The 40K RPG CORE RULES (career/rank system) for character generation/advancement needs an overhaul.

Peacekeeper_b said:

I'm giving all my players an extra talent. My Tyrannid War Veteran Ultra Tac gets Hatred (Tyranids). My Encountered the Fallen DA Lib gets FL(Astartes) for free. The Runepriest gets Counter-Attack. And so on.

Alex

After everything Space Marines get; all the starting talents, skills, traits and even gear, you think they need an upgrade? Really?

Stargazer4 said:

This isn't a comparison of Space Marines versus the rest of the WH40K-RPG games.

This is the OP pointing out what he believes is an imbalance within the Space Marine chapters and career choices. If you are playing Deathwatch, this is rather relevant.

When one choice is so clearly superior, its not empowering for the player. It forces the intelligent gamer to pick between "what he wants" and "what he knows is best". No matter what choice he makes, he ends up dissatisfied. This is unfortunate game design (but understandably it happens), and worth discussing or house ruling to a satisfying conclusion.

The only thing i have added to the Advancement table of Space Wolves for my players, is Counter Attack for 500 points, to stay more conform to the their Tabletop Version, other than that i do not see any reason to either boost Assault Marines, nor Space Wolves. Both are good enough in what they do. Optimizing is something i direly frown upon in my gaming group, true roleplaying builds do need to be optimized at all, but it is my personal opinion. We had a heated discussion on the issue, the sole player putting much higher importance on optimization than character concept, left the group and things settled down to everybodies satisfaction.

Brother-Sergeant Cloten said:

I haven't started playing DW yet, but I'm curious about balance issues like these. As you point out the talents chosen for the Blood Angel Marine above aren't really thematically appropriate for a SW assault marine. So what should a SW assault marine have and how do they compare cost/effectiveness wise with the frenzy-angel above?

Basically can you make a Space Wolf Assault Marine who can contribute as much to a squad as the Blood Angel Assault Marine, or will the BA simply outshine him?

Peacekeeper_b said:

Kage

tkis said:

In my approximation there are two methods of creating a character.

1) Create a personality, and then create mechanics.
2) Create mechanics, and then create a personality.

The assumption, by many, that option one (1) is somehow superior is insulting.

Weighing the options in order to make an informed decision . . . the nerve of some people.

darkrose50 said:

Both methods are fine, but optimization is not required for roleplaying. It either leads to an arms race with the GM which the player can never win, or to discrepancy in the groups playstyle. Neither leads to an enjoyable playing experience, at least for me. In my book roleplaying is about creating and acting out memorable personalities and situations, not statistic calculation and exploitation. It escapes me why it matters whether one can kill 2 Genestealers per round or just 1, it is about acting it out, and fleshing out the theme, mood and scene. But it is always a matter of personal taste, i moved away from optimization a long long time ago, and never look back.

tkis said:

Normally I would agree with you but not in Deathwatch. If I have ever seen a rpg where optimization of combat skills is a fundamental part of role-playing (and mind you I'm speaking from the GM's perspective, I'm not a DW player trying to justify munchkinism) then this is it. You are playing the spearhead special forces soldiers of an armed force that has countless billions of men at arms (and women too).

Of course it's all a matter of personal preferences and normally I would have fully subscribed to your POV. But I think DW calls for more than that. Optimizing your PC, trying to squeeze last bit of performance out of it is in character . The fate of the Imperium might one day weigh on your shoulders. It's the PCs who are heavily involved in breaking up HF Dagon before it can collect steam and roll further towards Terra. The foes are the most formidable that the galaxy has to offer.

That doesn't invalidate the necessity to develop a character beyond fighting. But fighting matters. In this game perhaps more than in any other.

What I mean by that is: by allowing the players to optimize, optimize, optimize a GM can implicitly convey the high stakes. And it will make intelligent players uneasy. Because if the GM doesn't object to them stacking up bonuses and buffs it means that the xenos will be a terrible thing to face. The only thing to keep in mind is maintaining proper in-team balance.

Alex

So far i have not seen this need to optimize in my games and preliminary sketched scenarious for future ones, keeping the stakes high is fine, but it is perfectly possible with an average marine and all the squad mode galore, that DW offers. Players have more then enough tools on their hands. As the matter of fact, my players are considering their options on what is possible to them outside of combat, they still want to play marines, they still want to be the heroes of the day, but too much emphasis on combat is not something they want.

Besides they finally got to apreciate the value of a nicely described standard attack, over a nondescriptive dicegasm of lightning attack with two chainswords and Flesh Render talent. Nobody begrudges the others for having or not having a particular skill or talent, they just enjoy what they have, and make the best out of it. Conveying the high stakes, and giving them the feeling of being the supreme fighting machines of the galaxy, has never been the problem with those guys But perhaps i am just blessed with the perfect group for my attitude.

I have to admitt though, that after playing Engel ( a completely descriptive game, without any statistical mechanics, where both players and GM create the story together based on a draw of tarot like card ) i consider the system more or less irrelevant, it changed my already skewed perspective of the role and necessety of mechanics and balance completely. I still like some numerics and limitations in a ruleset, but even for DW it is often just a crutch.

I percieve the book, more like a guideline of what marines and their adversaries approximately can and can not do, and what the approximate balance is supposed to be, working in such a loose framework during the game session, is a relaxing experience. Hard coded balance, is good for statistical equilibrium and competative environment, roleplaying for me is rather a creative one.

I realize that some people wear their sub-optimized characters as some kind of badge of RPG pride.

But being a player that enjoys optimizing does not preclude roleplaying. Nor should it automatically brand you as a munchkin.

I personally prefer players who make an effort to know their characters' strengths and weaknesses. It shows interest, and ultimately makes for a better, smoother gameplay since they educate themselves on systems and rules.

Munchkin: Someone who powergames with the goal to "be the best" and more or less run roughshod over the group and the GM's plans.

Intelligent Power Gamer: Someone with the interest and commitment to tweak their character to be the best its possible to be within his role in the group.

There is a world of difference between those two.

tkis said:

It does sound as though this thread really doesn't pertain to you or your group.

But if you look at it objectively, what the OP is pointing out is that if he wants to play an Assault Marine, his choice of Chapter has more impact on his role then the class.

Don't you find that slightly odd?

Bladehate said:

Say an Intelligent Power Gamer placing equal emphasis on Roleplaying wants to play a Space Wolf Assault marine. Is it necessary to look over to the Blood Angel table to see what the others get, rather then just go through own options and make the best out of it ? Who cares whether the Blood Angel kills twice the enemies if the Space Wolf makes a tale out of his own Heroic feats, which is told and retold during each great Feast on Fenris ? Who cares, whether the Ultramarine can keep the team together better by his superior tactical expertise, if the Space Wolf is able to ignite the true spirit of cameraderie in them and lead from the front with inspiration instead of cool and calculating approach. All options are viable even if not equal, it is about making the best of them, not looking at the shiny toys the others get.

And your point of view is valid.

The point of view that some players enjoy fiddling with numbers during character creation and leveling is equally valid.

Bladehate said:

Not really, i do not see the requirement of absolute Balance, the Chapters do not have to be equal. The Ultramarines are pictured as the ultimate strategists, the Blood Angels as the supreme melee combatants, the Black Templars as the zelots spreading their religious fervor, the Wolves as Scalds, the Dark Angels as brooding hoarders of secrets. Each Chapter being a good reflection of what they have been in the broader 40k background for a while. I do agree, that Space Wolves would require a bit more close combat aptitude, i found it rather odd to not find any close combat talent at all in their table, i solved that for my group pretty easily, in accord to their tabletop rules. But i do not see the need of ultimate balance between the chapters and rather love the striking differences.

Bladehate said:

Never debated that, i always state my opinion as my personal and subjective one. Based on personal view of the game background, personal experience, preferences and gaming environment.

You could also include mark of the Wulfen at a hugher level. also incorporate berserker rage.

We're not talking a razor's edge of balance.

But the choice of Chapter should not trump the choice of class when you're making a character for a specific role.

While I have not really done the "math" on this, isn't this more a matter of options available, rather than strength or ability of one compared to the other?

The BA has more direct combat options available, the SW has more social/perception options available. The thing is, the SW still has alot of combat options available.

Does every assault marine actually need frenzy/assassin strike (at rank 1)?

So while the BA assault marine is dumping his stuff in frenzy and flesh render, the SW is taking WS/STR advances, and TWW.

While the BA is cathing up with STR and WS, the SW is buying crushing blow/lightning attack, etc.

Is one path necessarily better than the other?

Also, yes, BAs make for awesome assault marines, but not really devastators. SW make for nice devs, given their perception related abilities. Maybe just because they come across as space vikings, they should not be lumped in as being good assault marines.

I will say they are kinda shafted though. A slightly weaker selection of skills and talents as opposed to others (or rather, exceedingly specific, to the point of not being as useful as say, fearless from BT, command from the smurfs, etc.). Their solo mode ability is alright, especially if handled by the GM (such that the GM is nice and generally gives them the heads up on detecting enemies). Their chapter squad mode abilities are on the weaker side (without tac expertise, their defensive pattern is useless without a fellow SW, and +10 to grapple/dodge, i mean, nice, but hardly worth justifying the cohesion cost if just benfiting yourself). I'm not too big on librarians, so I have not examined their psychic powers in depth, some seemed alright, others very specific (overall, given the small amount of total powers learned, chapter powers aren't too big a deal).

They make for excellent scouts/social types.

EDIT: on counter attack, isn't the TT idea of this very different than the talent? Shouldn't it be more counter charge in this system?

EDIT #2: Also, as a GM, I will probably rule that the SW solo mode ability also functions in squad mode, and rule that it is listed as solo purely for consistancy reasons (all chapters provide a solo mode ability).

KommissarK said:

Not aware of a counter charge like talent, the counter charge version of tabletop though allows you a better option to strike back if the enemy attacks you, counter attack goes more or less along similar lines, being available through the whole combat, but not as strong in the first round. For me a ferocity description works with the counter attack talent , it may not necessarily be finesse and parry riposte style, rather the danger of going up close and personal with a ferocious Space Wolf.